Articleabgf 2017 Heitorabel
Articleabgf 2017 Heitorabel
Articleabgf 2017 Heitorabel
net/publication/321072536
Integrating core and log data in the petrophysical rock type approach to
identify flow units and predict permeability in a carbonate reservoir of
Campos Basin
CITATIONS READS
0 1,635
2 authors:
All content following this page was uploaded by Abel Carrasquilla on 10 October 2018.
This paper was prepared for presentation during the 15th International Congress of the
fields of Middle East. These carbonate reservoirs are still
Brazilian Geophysical Society held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 31 July to 3 August, 2017. subjected to an intense diagenetic process, which may
Contents of this paper were reviewed by the Technical Committee of the 15th Interna- include cementation, dissolution, dolomitization, recrystal-
tional Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society and do not necessarily represent lization and biogenic action. The lithological complexity
any position of the SBGf, its officers or members. Electronic reproduction or storage of
any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the resulting from these processes makes it difficult to char-
Brazilian Geophysical Society is prohibited. acterize these rocks, when compared to siliciclastic ones.
____________________________________________________________________
The Campos Basin is the largest oil producer in the Bra-
Abstract zilian continental margin, currently accounting for more
than 70% of the national production. The oilfields present
This work characterizes the carbonate reservoir of Field in this basin include Albian carbonate reservoirs, with
A, located in the Campos Basin, using wireline logs and averages of porosity and permeability of 25% and 250
laboratory petrophysical data. The marked variation of mD, respectively. Given the complex heterogeneity of
petrophysical properties, a characteristic inherent to car- carbonate reservoirs, normally it exists a low recovery
bonate reservoirs, is a motivating factor for this work, factor, and a difficult correlation between rock properties
which seeks to overcome the difficulties of this evaluation. and geophysical data. The characterization of carbonate
In this sense, this work proposes to divide the reservoir reservoirs through an integrated study between their
region into zones in accord to different petrophysical petrophysical properties and their well logs provides a
characterization models, such as lithofacies descriptions, fundamental understanding of their geometry and their
petrophysical zones, units and flow zones. Dataset from dynamic properties (Bruhn et al., 2003).
two wells in the oilfield was then interpreted, from which
petrophysical parameters such as porosity and permeabil- The integration of geological and petrophysical data al-
ity were derived with a good correlation coefficient with lows the development of a rock - fluid model for the reser-
the core laboratory data. The multiple linear regression, voirs. This type of study identifies the different types of
the Cluster Analysis for Rock Typing and Hydrodynamic rocks that make up the reservoirs, as well as those non-
Flow Unit modules of the Interactive Petrophysics – IP reservoirs. A PRT (Petrophysical Rock Types) is defined
(Senergy, 2016) software were utilized, to evaluate the as a rock interval with singular pore geometry, a certain
Reservoir Quality Index, the Flow Zones and Hydraulic mineralogical composition and with certain specific char-
Flow Units. Once these petrophysical characteristics of acteristics of fluid flow. The fluid rock model relates fluid
the first well (A03) were determined, a blind test and a flow characteristics to certain PRT, using analytical tech-
correlation with the second well (A10) were performed. niques to develop such a model as the porosity and per-
With this methodology, it was possible to predict the po- meability analysis of the samples, plugs gas permeability
tential zones and, thus, to provide information that feed measurements, thin sheet analysis, analysis of electron
geological models that simulate the behavior of the reser- microscope pore structures, capillary pressure by mercury
voir in production. injection, pore throat size distribution and the interpreta-
tion of well logs. The consolidation of the results of these
Introduction various analysis techniques reveals the existence of litho-
In this work, a study of flow zoning of the carbonate res- facies, and it is hoped that similarities between the mod-
ervoir of Field A of the Campos Basin was built up. From els proposed by the various techniques will result (Amae-
this, it was proposed a method for determining permeabil- fule et al., 1993).
ity by combining linear regressions in accord to the flow The classification of the reservoir rock, in accord to
units in which this part of the reservoir is contained. Even- Amaefule et al. (1993), is a synergistic process between
tually, it validates the models developed against experi- geology, petrophysics and reservoir engineering, through
mental data of porosity and permeability of oil reservoir which a reservoir volume is divided into a limited number
rocks. This integration of well log data and laboratory of rock types that have:
petrophysical data can therefore bring forth solutions that a) Different ranges of petrophysical properties (porosity,
lead to the exploration and production of oil in carbonate permeability, water saturation and capillary pressure
reserves and provide a basis for a methodology and characteristics) or distinct correlations between the
workflow for similar reservoirs. fundamental properties.
Most of the hydrocarbon reservoir in the world is located b) Common diagenetic features, including both deposi-
in carbonate rocks. Regarding Lucia (2007), carbonates tional facies and diagenesis, which determined pore
cover about 7% of the Earth's surface, even so, more types and geometries present, and thus the petro-
than 60% of the world's oil reserves and 40% of gas are physical properties.
present in them, of which 70% corresponds to the giant
Figure 1. Lithofacies (track 2) and basic logs of wells A03 and A10: gamma ray and transit time logs
(track 3), resistivity logs (track 4) and density and neutron porosity (track 5) for wells A03 e A10.
(a)
(a) (b)
(c)
Figure 3. Well A03: (a) Flow units and ranges of corresponding IZF values. (B) Equations for permeability
based on laboratory porosity - UFs. (C) Distribution z versus RQI (calculated for laboratory porosity).
(a) (b)
(c)
Figure 4. Well A10: (a) Flow units and ranges of corresponding IZF values. (B) Equations for permeability
based on laboratory porosity - UFs. (C) Distribution z versus RQI (calculated for laboratory porosity).
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Well A03 Well A10
(c)
Figure 5. Lithofacies (track 2), Lorenz curve (track 3), flow zones (track 4), flow units (track 5), permeability curves for wells
A03 (a) and A10 (b), compared with laboratory measurements (tracks 6 and 7).
Figure 3. Well A03: (a) Flow units and ranges of corresponding IZF values. (B) Equations for permeability
based on laboratory porosity - UFs. (C) Distribution z versus RQI (calculated for laboratory porosity).
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
(c)
Figure 4. Well A10: (a) Flow units and ranges of corresponding IZF values. (B) Equations for permeability
based
Figure on laboratorybetween
6. Comparative porositythe
- UFs.
flow(C) Distribution
zones z versus
(a) and between theRQI (calculated
basic forof
well logs (b) laboratory
the wells porosity).
A03 and A10.